  |
|
|
|
Recently, Monica Lewinsky launched a television career with her appearance in a commercial for a popular weight loss program. Hillary Clinton now resides in Chappaqua New York. First daughter Chelsea has apparently accepted the unofficial title as the "first hostess." All seems normal as lame duck President Clinton enters the final phase of his presidency eager to establish his niche in history. Despite last year's impeachment turbulence, the government appears to be operating normally.
A nation's legitimate security needs have always necessitated a certain degree of secrecy. It certainly seems morally acceptable to keep both potential and real enemies off balance by conducting active disinformation programs. However, when the crisis subsides and during the post crisis debriefing, the veil of secrecy should be lifted both to discourage its continued use beyond the time of need and to allow for a broadly based evaluation of the government's crisis management procedures. During the Cold War era historical evidence seems to support the view that the national security became an all-encompassing excuse for a dangerous expansion of secrecy measures. The "fear of the Soviets" rationale was used to justify the exposure of soldiers to battlefield radiation, LSD dosing and denying chemically induced casualties in both the Vietnam and Persian Gulf conflicts. [ Government Secrecy Related Web Sites- http://www.fas.org/sgp/secrecy.html ] The declassification of formerly top-secret documents (under the Freedom of Information Act) reveals a consistent fifty-year pattern of abusive practices. To demonstrate how convoluted our obsession with secrecy became allow me to cite part of the defense for Daniel Ellsberg in the Pentagon Papers Case. Daniel Ellsberg was accused of stealing a top-secret Pentagon study of the origins of American involvement in Vietnam from his employer-The Rand Corporation. (Interestingly, the report revealed evidence of secretive deceptive practices by the Kennedy administration.) The government prosecutors summed up their case by arguing that Dr. Ellsberg's theft of top-secret documents jeopardized America's security and as such, he should be severely punished. In his summation, Ellsberg's attorney pointed out that there were 26 security designations higher than top secret (including some that the President did not have access to) therefore the magnitude of his crime had to be viewed in that context. Go To Page: 1 2 |
|
|
|
